Happy Talk Like a Pirate Day ye scurvy bilge rats!

This be the likeness of Pirate Queen, Scarlett Harlott, cast yer eyes upon her site or be cursed fer certain!
Asks the most recent Jesus and Mo:
And then they flew off to their respective flocks to claim victory…
[Hat tip to Wonderful Life.]
Creationists often portray natural selection —usually citing Herbert Spencer’s expression, “survival of the fittest”— as being a matter of the strong subjugating or eliminating the weak, usually tying it to eugenics, racism and ultimately (of course) to Adolf Hitler.
Here is a fun cartoon by Jay Hosler (author of Drawing Flies) that amusingly illustrates that this is at best an extreme oversimplification of the how natural selection actually works (click on the image for a larger version).
So if you really want to ‘win’ the evolutionary race, the way to do it is to “make love, not war”.
Of course it does sometimes happen in nature that organisms attempt to directly eliminate competition for resources—lions killing hyenas (between species), older larger bird chicks pushing younger siblings out of the nest (within a species)— but it is usually through the more indirect method of simply leaving more offspring and thus eventually dominating the environment. That way the competition fizzles out and goes extinct on its own rather than being directly attacked in any way.
Also such “might makes right” caricatures of natural selection ignore the fact that cooperative behavior within species can also lead to increased “fitness” as is seen in social species like ourselves as well as between different species as is the case with mutualistic relationships; the Yucca plant and some species of Yucca Moths for example.
Then there is the problem that creationists are trying to project the is-ought fallacy onto evolution. The idea being that though the process of natural selection sometimes leads to behavior that we would normally consider cruel or immoral, since it is natural, it is therefore good and we should encourage it.
However the mere fact that we observe something to happen in nature in one context does not mean that it is something upon which we would want to model our own behavior. In fact our success as a species in largely due to the fact that we don’t model our behavior on what we see in nature, or allowing nature to take its course.
See:
Index to Creationist Claims – Claim CA002 and Claim CA002.1
Evolution and Philosophy – Does evolution make might right? by John S. Wilkins
[Hat tip to NCSE on Facebook for the cartoon]
Stephen Colbert reports on how “Papa Bear” Bill O’Reilly has been unfairly maligned over his comments regarding the origin of the tides:
Hi-frelling-lareous! And you can’t explain that.
So that there is no miscommunication, in the event that something happens to the YouTube version here is the official Colbert Nation video. The relevant bit starts at about 2:30.
Vodpod videos no longer available.
Before I launch into a bit of a rant, for what little it’s worth, I’d like to offer my condolences to the families who lost loved ones and my best wishes for a full and speedy recovery to those wounded in the attack in Tucson Arizona last Saturday (1-8-2011).
For the last few days I have been reading and listening to “liberal” friends and media pundits shrilly denouncing all Republicans, “conservatives” and/or tea-party members as malevolent violence inciting demons who, I am given to understand, are almost entirely responsible for the horrific shootings that took place in Arizona on Saturday. Yes they had a minor assist in the crime from the apparently schizophrenic gunman Jared Lee Loughner but judging by some of the rhetoric emanating from the Left-wing of the country, the real perpetrators of this monstrous act of violence was, in descending order of responsibility: Sarah Palin, various wingnut talk show hosts and Republicans and tea-party people in general.
It is true that Loughner seems to be a deeply disturbed young man but apparently, according to many on the Left, he likely never would have contemplated violence, not even in his most fevered psychotic dreams, had not Sarah Palin used target symbols on a map of North America during the last election cycle; which for all we know Loughner never saw.
Yes, there can be no doubt whatsoever that young Loughner was nigh on brainwashed into doing violence by Palin and her tea-bagger minions and we know this based on… Well he shot a Democrat, and, ah, tea-baggers don’t like Democrats and many of them have engaged in overheated extremist rhetoric, with target thingies, therefore Loughner must be a tea-bagger.
That is sum total of evidence that I have seen presented for Loughner’s supposed tea-bagger motivations. The (apparent) primary target was a Democrat (Rep. Gabrielle Giffords) and some tea-party/Republicans have used extreme possibly violence inspiring rhetoric therefore any violence done to a Democrat must therefore have been perpetrated by someone sympathetic to the tea-party/Republicans and who was inspired by their rhetoric.
Of course slowly over the last few days details about Loughner have started to leak out that if not good evidence against his supposed tea-bagginess, at least seem not to fit the stereotype. This of course led to the equally ridiculous Right-wing backlash. According to some on the Right now Loughner is a “Marxist-loving, Hitler-loving, Bible-hating Atheist Doper ” and his atheism may have contributed to his motivation in some way.
This backlash caused some on the Left to finally start looking for evidence for what they already thought must be true (that Loughner is a tea-bagger). For example my estimable colleague in the fight against antievolutionists, P.Z. Myers, after having “guessed” on his blog Pharyngula that the perpetrator of the shooting would turn out to be a “Teabagger who listens to a lot of AM talk radio“, responded to the conservative backlash by posting a screen shot of what was purported to be Loughner’s voter registration, listing him as a Republican and asking sarcastically: “My eyes are getting a little old. Does it say “SOCIALIST” for political affiliation?”
When it was pointed out that this image was a hoax and that Loughner was in fact registered as an independent, PZ added an addendum noting that is was fake and saying: “I’m a little mystified about why anyone would forge a record like this, though.”
It seem pretty obvious to me why they did it. They faked this image for exactly the same reason PZ, based on zero evidence, “guessed” that the perpetrator would turn out to be a tea-bagger and for the same reason he uncritically posted the fake image in support of his earlier guess. They did it because they wanted to exploit this tragedy to score rhetorical points against their political rivals. The truth can be sorted out later.
That’s fine. PZ has every right to do such things. However it may tend to detract from his credibility when he wants to criticize Answers in Genesis the next time they imply (stupidly) that similar tragedies can ultimately be pinned on Charles Darwin and evolutionary theory, as they did with the Columbine and Virginia Tech shootings.
However amongst all the anti-bagger wailing and gnashing of teeth, there were a couples of well known Left leaning pundits that commented on the tragedy whose responses I thought were spot on. First Jon Stewart:
Vodpod videos no longer available.
Daily Show on Arizona Shootings, posted with vodpod
Exactly right! Thank you Mr. Stewart.
Secondly with a shorter and more comedic take, Stephen Colbert:
Vodpod videos no longer available.
Once again we have to depend on the “clowns” for reasoned, rational discourse…
If you’re not there you better be dead or in jail and if your in jail BREAK OUT!
[Laugh, hoot, cackle!]
The National Center for Science Education has announced their ‘creation’ of a new annual award, the “Upchucky”, to be “bestowed on the most noisome creationist of the year”. I love it! And they certainly have a nominee rich environment which they can select from.
The contenders for the first annual Upchucky were:
And the Upchucky goes to…
The virulently ignorant Don “Somebody’s got to stand up to experts” McLeroy! [pre-recorded applause].
I’m sure it was a tough decision for the judges but when one considers that he was someone with actual authority over what was taught in public schools I think he was the best choice of this line up.
Bravo NCSE!
[Hat-tip to Thoughts in a Haystack]
Though I doubt there are many evolution defenders who would be that ignorant of basic Judeo/Christian theology.
[Via Pharyngula]